Delhi Court September 1999 Judgments

Commr. of C. Ex. Vs. Modern Steels Ltd.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2000)(116)ELT512TriDel

1. An appeal of the respondents herein was decided by this Bench of the Tribunal. The question involved in the said appeal was whether Modvat credit on subsidiary gate passes issued after 31-3-1994, but original gate passes, on the strength of which subsidiary gate passes were issued, issued before 1-4-1994 by the manufacturer of the gods, is admissible on not.2. The Tribunal held that the Modvat credit is clearly admissible in terms of Notification 16/94. Hence the appeal was allowed with consequential relief to the respondents herein.3. The present application has been filed by the Revenue that a question of law arises as follows :- "Whether subsidiary certificate in lieu of GPIs issued after 1-4-1994 would fall under the coverage of Entry number 10 in the table to the Notification No. 16/94-C.E. (NT), dated 30-3-1994 and would subsequently become eligible document for taking credit under the Modvat Scheme?" In order to appreciate the contention of the Revenue whether a question of ...

Collector of C. Ex. Vs. Kohinoor Proofing Industries

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2000)LC562Tri(Delhi)

1. In this appeal filed by the Revenue, the matter relates to the classification of fabrics described as Tarpaulin (Gold Colour), which the respondents, M/s. Kohinoor Proofing Industries had claimed that they were classifiable under Heading No. 52.07 of the Central Excise Tariff, which covered woven fabrics of cotton containing 80% or more by weight of cotton. Investigations were conducted by the Revenue and the samples were drawn of the fabric in dispute. It was proposed that the said fabrics were classifiable under Heading No. 59.06 of the Tariff, which covered textile fabrics other than tyre cord fabric classifiable under Heading No. 59.02. On appeal, the Collector of Central Excise (Appeals) had held that the fabric in question was classifiable under Heading No. 52.07 of the Central Excise Tariff.3. We have heard Shri A.K. Prasad, SDR, who submitted that the report of the Chemical Examiner was categorical that the fabric in question was impregnated for the purposes of Central Exci...

Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Jaora Sugar Mills

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2000)(115)ELT124TriDel

1. In this appeal filed by the Revenue, the matter relates to the modalities of clearances in respect of excess sugar eligible for concessional rate of duty under Notification No. 160/88-C.E., dated 3-5-1988. The respondents, M/s. Jaora Sugar Mills have prayed for decision on merits.2. We have heard Shri V.M. Udhoji, JDR and have gone through the records.3. During the period 1-5-1988 to 31-7-1988, the respondents were eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 160/88-C.E. in respect of 10,626, quintals of sugar. At the end of the period, they had only a quantity of 7,826 quintals and prayed that for the balance quantity of 2,800 quintals, they may be allowed to clear equivalent quantity irrespective of the period of production. This was denied by the Asstt.Collector of Central Excise. The Commissioner of Central Excise (Appeals) referred to para-3 of the Notification and observed that benefit of the Notification aforesaid was available in respect of excess quantity irrespective of t...

Threads (India) Limited Vs. Collector of C. Ex.

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2000)(117)ELT644TriDel

1. This is an appeal against the order passed by the Commissioner (A) confiscating spool of sewing threads and confirming the demand of Rs. 2,10,800/- by not allowing the benefit of Proforma Credit under the provisions of Rule 56A(5).2. The facts of the case in brief are that the appellants manufacture sewing threads and core spun. An intelligence was received by the Central Excise officers that the appellants were suppressing the correct figures of production and clandestine removal of the goods. A surprise visit was paid to the factory premises on 9-9-1994. When the stock was physically verified a quantity of 16,079 numbers of spool of sewing threads of different varieties involving central excise duty of Rs. 2,09,116/- was found in excess. Shri K.L. Narang, General Manager in his statement admitted the excess and stated that this excess stock was transferred to the BSR due to shortage of space in the packing room. Being not satisfied with the explanation, the goods were seized.Scru...

Cce Vs. Mewar Steel Forging and Foundary

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2000)(68)ECC601

1. The issue involved in this appeal is whether the Additional Collector who adjudicated the matter and confirmed the demand should have imposed penalty on the respondents.2. Shri Ashok Kumar, learned JDR submitted that Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Z.B. Nagarkar v. U.O.I. 1999 (89) ECR 29 (SC) has held that it appears from the examination of Rule 173Q that apart from the offending goods which are liable to confiscation the person concerned with that shall be liable to penalty up to the amount specified in the Rule. It is difficult to accept the argument of the appellant that levy of penalty is discretionary. He, therefore, contended that the Additional Collector was required to have imposed the penalty in this matter.3. Shri J.S. Agarwal, learned Advocate, appearing on behalf of the respondents, submitted that the respondents had also filed Appeal No.2817/92B against the impugned order and their appeal has been finally disposed of Vide Final Order No. E/3/95-B1 dated 5.12.94. ...

Commissioner of Customs Vs. Weston Electronics

Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Reported in: (2000)LC69Tri(Delhi)

1.1 The respondents herein are 100% EOU allegedly manufacturing Recorded Audio Compact Discs. They record music on magnetic tapes called as Analogue Master. The transfer of music from Analogue Master to the Compact Discs required conversion of analogue recording into digital recording by using converters through a process of interfaced synchronisation of recording facilities which the respondents did not have. The respondents, therefore, exported the Analogue Master to Korea where the music was transferred to the Compact Discs. The Compact Discs and Analogue Master were then imported. The respondents also imported Compact Discs Box and Tray.1.2 They availed the benefit of Notification No. 13/81. Sl.No. 3 of the Notification was availed for the Compact Discs. Sl. No. 9 of the Notification was availed for the Compact Disc box and tray. The inlay cards were purchased locally.1.3 The Compact Discs imported after recording of music were subjected to detailed processes of tests like listeni...

Satya Malhotra and ors. Vs. Mohinder Singh Arora

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1999VAD(Delhi)947; 81(1999)DLT627; 2000(52)DRJ146

ORDERVijender Jain, J.1. Aggrieved by the order of dismissal of the application for leave to defend, the petitioners (original respondent) have filed the present revision petition. The impugned order has passed by the Rent Controller on 6.1.1999. 2. Mr. Mukul Rohtai, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner has contended that the application for leave to defend was filed in 1991 whereas the reply to the said application was filed by the respondent (eviction petitioner) in the year 1998 which would demonstrate that the respondent's requirement was not bone fide. Mr. Rohtagi has argued that the respondent was not the owner of the premise in question as original owner Shri D.V.S. Gupta, who let out the premises through his father Shri Laxmi Narain to the petitioner in 1944 had sold the property in 1970 to one Dr. Diwan Singh and as Dr. Diwan Singh had not paid the total consideration, thereforee, the title of Dr. Diwan Singh was defective and he could not have executed a sale-deed in fav...

Yogesh Kant Bhageria Vs. Deepak Jain

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1999VAD(Delhi)860; AIR2000Delhi42; 82(1999)DLT269; 1999(51)DRJ336; (2000)124PLR40

ORDERS.K. Agarwal, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 7th August, 1998 passed by the Court of Shri J.M. Malik, Additional District Judge, Delhi granting a decree in favor of the respondent/plaintiff for Rs. 71,500/- (interest calculated at the rate of 1-1/2% per month) with proportionate costs and pendente lite and future interest at the same rate from the date of institution of the suit till realisation of the decretal amount. 2. Brief facts are that the respondent filed a suit against the appellant alleging that he had borrowed a total sum of Rs. 48,000/- through four different cheques; that he had agreed to pay interest at the rate of 3% per month; that neither principal amount nor interest thereon was paid, despite notice dated 1st May, 1988 to the appellant and a decree of Rs. 95,000/- with costs and pendente lite interest and future interest at the rate of 3% per month till realisation was sought. Appellant in the written statement denied the alleg...

international Building and Furnishing Company (Cal) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Indi ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 82(1999)DLT307

Mohd. Shamim, J. 1. This is an application by the defendant under Order 13, Rule 2 and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for permission to place on record the documents annexed with the application. 2. It has been urged for and on behalf of the defendant that while going through the record the Counsel for the defendant to his dismay and horror found that certain very important and material documents such as, the correspondence exchanged in between the parties, the minutes recorded during inspection at the site of work and the documents regarding the work got done at the risk and cost of the plaintiff had not been filed Along with other documents. The said documents could not be filed inadvertently earlier as different files were being maintained with regard to the work which was to be done by the plaintiff. The plaintiff failed to complete the work. Hence the work which was assigned to the plaintiff was got done through a third party. Consequently the files relating to the wor...

Chhabra Handicrafts Vs. Deputy Director, Enforcement Directorate

Court: Appellate Tribunal for foreign Exchange New Delhi

1. These 5 appeals have arisen from a common Adjudication Order No. SK/DD/III/35 of 1992 dated 28-4-1992 imposing a penalty of Rs. 50,000 on the appellant-firm (Appeal No. 244 of 1992). Chhabra Handicrafts and Rs. 10,000 on each of the other 4 appellants (Appeal Nos. 245-248 of 1992) in their capacity as partners of the appellant-firm for contravention of the provisions of section 18(2) of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (the Act) on account of non-realisation of amount of US $ 11,931.70 + US $ 6,337.04 totalling US $ 18,268.74 in respect of two GRI Nos. CA 393847 and CA 49421, respectively. As these appeals are filed against a common adjudication order passed on same facts, they are disposed of by this common order. 2. A Memorandum No. T-4/179/D of 1987 dated 23-7-1987 was issued simultaneously to all the appellants herein asking them to show cause as to why adjudication proceedings should not be held against them on the ground that Chhabra Handicrafts failed to realise the ...